They define it with an itelligence test that tests for several intellectual abilities. But all IQ tests are flawed or inadequate in some way. They can't test for everything. A person with low intelligence will not pass the test, but even those who do pass have their intellectual deficits. And then there are differences in understanding and personality. People who test high on IQ tests are as different from each other as people in a mixed population. You'd be better off finding a group with similar interests than depending on IQ scores alone. And people who score high on IQ tests and who think that is a particular advantage socially are not necessarily interesting people. They can certainly be supercilious snobs. LoisI'm pleasantly surprised to find that there aren't too many of those snobs around here. The level of discourse here is so much more civil and reasonable than my previous forum hangout over at http://forums.about.com/discussions/AgnosticismAtheism/ab-atheism?lgnF=y&nav=messages&redirCnt=1 , which used to be a wonderful place for intelligent debate but has lately devolved into a place where four or five bullies (who seemed, nonetheless, to be quite intelligent) have driven out most of the frequent contributors. The place is a bit of a graveyard now. Anyone else here who used to hang out over there?
They define it with an itelligence test that tests for several intellectual abilities. But all IQ tests are flawed or inadequate in some way. They can't test for everything. A person with low intelligence will not pass the test, but even those who do pass have their intellectual deficits. And then there are differences in understanding and personality. People who test high on IQ tests are as different from each other as people in a mixed population. You'd be better off finding a group with similar interests than depending on IQ scores alone. And people who score high on IQ tests and who think that is a particular advantage socially are not necessarily interesting people. They can certainly be supercilious snobs. LoisI'm pleasantly surprised to find that there aren't too many of those snobs around here. The level of discourse here is so much more civil and reasonable than my previous forum hangout over at http://forums.about.com/discussions/AgnosticismAtheism/ab-atheism?lgnF=y&nav=messages&redirCnt=1 , which used to be a wonderful place for intelligent debate but has lately devolved into a place where four or five bullies (who seemed, nonetheless, to be quite intelligent) have driven out most of the frequent contributors. The place is a bit of a graveyard now. Anyone else here who used to hang out over there? As an atheist myself I do not frequent any websites with a stated limiting agenda, including atheism or agnosticism. I prefer fora such as CFI because it's agenda is "humanism" which is all inclusive and allows for free discussion on a variety of subjects. As to the term intelligence, IMO, intelligence is the ability to find the fundamental premise of a question. One can put forth a brilliant logical argument, but if it is founded on a false premise it is of no real value and may even lead to a misleading conclusion. I believe that, in any discussion, it might be helpful to first state the fundamental principle on which the argument is based. I recently saw a movie named "frequencies" which touched on this in a profound way. It proposes that all things in the universe respond to wave forms and frequencies of those wave forms and pure logical intelligence is not necessarily connected to "being in harmony" with one's environment. To anyone who has access to this movie, I can recommend watching it. An example (in that movie) was that during a heated argument the father of one of the brilliant students suddenly began to play Chopin on his piano. The argument stopped immediately and all who were present stopped arguing and started listening and became absorbed in the melody and chord progressions. When someone asked the pianist why he was playing music, his response was that the genius of Chopin forced the listeners toward the same frequencies and the previous discord (disagreement) dissolved instantly, because everyone was "tuned in" to the same frequency levels. He further went on to say that if you "recognize" a musical composition which you had never heard before, it was because it resonated at a fundamental level in the listener. This simple statement resonated in me and answered several questions about our relationship to the wholeness of the universe. Coming from Holland, the first time I heard the term Universe, I intuitively interpreted the word as Uni-Verse, or "single song". This is not the official definition of the word Universe, but IMO, speaks to to the fundamental inherent potential of the universe. I believe, David Bohm identified this fundamental universal connectedness as the universal "insight intelligence". I am sure he did not imply an intelligent, motivated god, but a universal resonance to which all things repond at a fundamental level. Charles Ives understood this and wrote "The Unanswered Question" which demonstrates the implaccable nature of universal harmony and the discord that ensues when trying to explain this phenomenon in bits and pieces. As an eminent physicist dealing with bits and pieces, Bohm saw a deeper, more fundamental state which is responsible for the evolutionary process, not only of the universe, but of everything contained therein. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbArUJBRRJ0 and for a Leonard Bernstein lecture on the connectedness of language to music, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_fxB6yrDVo What is intelligence? Man has a large brain capable of imagination (arguably our greatest intellectual asset), but there are many animals who are able to use intellectual abilities far beyond the abilities of humans. A bat uses high frequency sonar, a whale uses low frequency sonar. Birds use the earth's magnetic fields as maps. When it is time to swarm, bees "discuss" the best possible new site from information passed on by "site scouts". The cuttlefish is a true shape shifter with the ability to imitate and completely blend into its environment. The "slime mold" has no brain at all, but can navigate a maze to find the shortest route to food. Man is only able to copy these abilities into machines. But is our ability to learn any different from the ability to learn in other organisms? Perhaps we tend to give ourselves too much credit for our ability to use gadgets, while ignoring the natural harmonic excellence residing in other living organisms.
Your thoughts reminded me of a scientist, (can’t think of his name) who was working on the idea of “morphic resonation” among organisms.
They define it with an itelligence test that tests for several intellectual abilities. But all IQ tests are flawed or inadequate in some way. They can't test for everything. A person with low intelligence will not pass the test, but even those who do pass have their intellectual deficits. And then there are differences in understanding and personality. People who test high on IQ tests are as different from each other as people in a mixed population. You'd be better off finding a group with similar interests than depending on IQ scores alone. And people who score high on IQ tests and who think that is a particular advantage socially are not necessarily interesting people. They can certainly be supercilious snobs. LoisI'm pleasantly surprised to find that there aren't too many of those snobs around here. The level of discourse here is so much more civil and reasonable than my previous forum hangout over at http://forums.about.com/discussions/AgnosticismAtheism/ab-atheism?lgnF=y&nav=messages&redirCnt=1 , which used to be a wonderful place for intelligent debate but has lately devolved into a place where four or five bullies (who seemed, nonetheless, to be quite intelligent) have driven out most of the frequent contributors. The place is a bit of a graveyard now. Anyone else here who used to hang out over there? Never been there, but you might try AtheismvsChristianity@googlegroups.com. They have their share of crazies but there are enough rational members to cancel them out. Some of the exchanges are priceless. Lois
Your thoughts reminded me of a scientist, (can't think of his name) who was working on the idea of "morphic resonation" among organisms.An experiment was conducted whereby a still beating adult heart was placed in a petri dish and the still beating heart of a newborn was placed 12" away and without connection of any kind. It was observed that after a few seconds the fast beating infant's heart slowed down and became synchronized with the slower, but stronger, beating heart of the adult. This was a serious and controlled scientific experiment. "synchronicity"? In physics we speak of "fields", such as electro-magenetic fields which radiate at certain wave-lengths and frequencies, which influence the objects within those fields. What is rthe mechanism that allows bodies to "feel" and "respond" to those fields. At the atomic scale all things respond to those fields. "resonance"? Bohm speaks of the "holomovement" of the universe and likens it to a grand river flowing, but displaying eddies, rapids, and wave interferences, which are causal to the movements of objects within that larger stream. Intuitively I see an elegant and profound concept in his hypotheses.
Of course, I am skeptical, but it seems no less believable than the idea of “dark energy”.
Of course, I am skeptical, but it seems no less believable than the idea of "dark energy".I agree, but consider that whatever "dark energy" is, it must behave in a wavelike manner and must consist of certain frequencies, perhaps an infinite number of wave-frequencies. Energy is an "expression" of the wave function. A photon travels as a wave but becomes a unit of energy when measured. By that logic the wave function must be the fundamental "medium" from which existence becomes explicate. Bohm called this medium "pure potential" in which "implications" form, which then become expressed (explicate) in reality. Perhaps this Dark Energy is the unused waveforms (the universal potential) which is not measurable (collapsable as measurable energy) by our current technology. We have a chart of electro-magnetic frequencies (wave forms) from deep infrared to high ultraviolet, but is that chart complete? As far as I know, we are unable to measure the energy of "virtual particles" able to travel at superluminal speeds. But we know they exist, because occasionally they pop in and out of existence (perhaps slowed down by wave interference) and enter our reality, but invariably have an extremely short life span before disintegrating, because they cannot exist at the luminal speed of our reality.
I don't recall the specifics, but a while ago a psychologist at USC did a statistical analysis (I'm not sure of what) and found there were fourteen distinctly different types of intelligence. Many years ago some members of the local Unitarian church asked me to apply to join Mensa. From what I saw of their behavior and thinking, I decided that Mensa must define ego as intelligence. These people weren't very clear thinking but since they had passed some test that Mensa gives they were sure they were brilliant.and
I’ve found most Mensa people to be smart but overbearing and annoying.Gee, I just joined the forums today. Maybe I'm not welcome as a 25 year member of Mensa. To answer a question: "Mensa's requirement for membership is a score at or above the 98th percentile on certain standardised IQ or other approved intelligence tests, such as the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales. The minimum accepted score on the Stanford-Binet is 132, while for the Cattell it is 148." Why would someone join Mensa? I would say for the people, the activities and the publications. Most cities have chapters where people get together to play board games, go out to eat and do things that other clubs do. Mensa has a great monthly magazine with interesting articles, book reviews and other features. There are regional, national and international gathering with top speakers in a wide variety of subjects. There is a annual Mind Games event where we play, evaluate and rate new games coming on the market. There are several dozen special interest groups of a diverse mix. I haven't run into many Mensans with huge egos. If you were trying to categorize Mensans, you might say that a fair number are eccentric in some way. Some can be socially awkward. Hey, in school the cheerleaders hung together, the jocks hung together, the "brains" were often left out/excluded. Mensa is a place to connect with like minded people who "get you". As a group, we like to play games, solve puzzles, make puns and eat chocolate. What's wrong with that? Brooks
The post is from 2014 Brooks.
Sadly Occam passed away awhile back.
My Dad is a Mensa member and he is a pain in the ass.
Sorry to hear about Occam.
Maybe he’d be a pain in the ass even if he wasn’t a Mensan. 
Maybe he'd be a pain in the ass even if he wasn't a Mensan. :-)I think in runs in the family.
Both of yuz are right. :lol: